DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Examiner notes
Examiner cites particular columns, paragraphs, figures and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. The entire reference is considered to provide disclosure relating to the claimed invention. The claims & only the claims form the metes & bounds of the invention. Office personnel are to give the claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the supporting disclosure. Unclaimed limitations appearing in the specification are not read into the claim. Prior art was referenced using terminology familiar to one of ordinary skill in the art. Such an approach is broad in concept and can be either explicit or implicit in meaning. Examiner's Notes are provided with the cited references to assist the applicant to better understand how the examiner interprets the applied prior art. Such comments are entirely consistent with the intent & spirit of compact prosecution.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-7, and 14, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HSU et al., US 2020/0376733 (HSU) in view of Andy Rose et al., The effect of melt compressibility on mold filling of thin-walled parts (Rose).
Claim 1
HSU teaches Computer-implemented method for calculating a nominal profile for the movement of an injection actuator of a molding machine, wherein - a simulation domain is defined, wherein the simulation domain comprises at least one cavity of a mold installed on the molding machine (HSU 0007) “The method includes steps of specifying a simulating domain comprising a mold cavity and a barrel of an injection machine”
- at least one simulation is performed in the simulation domain, wherein the injection of a molding material into the at least one cavity of the mold is simulated by predefining at least one volume flow profile through an inlet face at the edge of the simulation domain and/or by predefining at least one pressure profile at the inlet face as boundary condition, (HSU 0011 “In some embodiments, the boundary conditions of the mesh are determined using a set of lines to divide a screw movement zone in the barrel into a set of layers.” (HSU 0056) “the amount of the molding material 700 transferred into the mold cavity 730 by the screw 720 in the barrel 710 depends on the motion of the screw 720 with respect to the velocity field (u).” {EXAMINERS NOTE: This implies that boundary conditions (volume flow or pressure are specified at the inlet to simulate injection.}
HSU does not explicitly teach but Rose teaches - a volume flow profile calculated using the simulation and/or the at least one volume flow profile is converted into a nominal profile for the movement of an injection actuator, in particular a plasticizing screw (Rose pg. 10) As disclosed the relationship between injection rate and filling rate 1s expressed as Qscrew=Qfill, and Qscrew is associated with velocity of the screw.
- a compressibility of the molding material is taken into account in the conversion. (Rose Pg 19)
PNG
media_image1.png
370
945
media_image1.png
Greyscale
{Examiners note: equation for melt compression rate}
HSU and Rose are analogous to the claimed invention because they are from the same field of endeavor of INJECTION-MOLDING simulation.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of HSU and Rose before him or her, to modify the simulation of HSU with the volume profile calculation of Rose to reduce the number of molding operations and shorten the setup time as suggested in HSU 0004.
Claim 2
Modified HSU teaches The computer-implemented method for simulating the injection of the molding material into a cavity, in particular according to claim 1, wherein - a simulation domain is defined, wherein the simulation domain comprises at least one cavity of a mold installed on the molding machine (HSU 0048) “Referring to FIG. 3, the main step of the injection-molding simulation method 60 includes steps S602, S604, S606, S608 and S610. The method 60 may begin with step S602, in which a simulating domain at least including a mold cavity and a barrel of a molding machine are specified.
- at least one simulation is performed in the simulation domain , wherein the injection of a molding material into the at least one cavity of the mold is simulated by predefining at least one volume flow profile through an inlet face at the edge of the simulation domain and/or by predefining at least one pressure profile at the inlet face as boundary condition, (HSU 0011 “In some embodiments, the boundary conditions of the mesh are determined using a set of lines to divide a screw movement zone in the barrel into a set of layers.” (HSU 0056) “the amount of the molding material 700 transferred into the mold cavity 730 by the screw 720 in the barrel 710 depends on the motion of the screw 720 with respect to the velocity field (u).” {EXAMINERS NOTE: This implies that boundary conditions (volume flow or pressure are specified at the inlet to simulate injection.}
- a volume flow profile calculated using the simulation and/or the volume flow profile is converted into a nominal profile for the movement of an injection actuator, in particular a plasticizing screw (Rose pg. 10) As disclosed the relationship between injection rate and filling rate 1s expressed as Qscrew=Qfill, and Qscrew is associated with velocity of the screw.
- an overall simulation is then carried out, wherein the overall simulation } simulates the injection of the molding material into the cavity of the mold and the molding material in a barrel of the molding machine taking into account the movement of the injection actuator according to the nominal profile from the conversion (HSU 0011 “In some embodiments, the boundary conditions of the mesh are determined using a set of lines to divide a screw movement zone in the barrel into a set of layers.” (HSU 0056) “the amount of the molding material 700 transferred into the mold cavity 730 by the screw 720 in the barrel 710 depends on the motion of the screw 720 with respect to the velocity field (u).” {EXAMINERS NOTE: Simulation explicitly includes the barrel and determines simulation boundary conditions while considering screw motion (injection actuator)}
Claim 3
Modified HSU with Rose teaches The method according to claim 1, wherein the compressibility of the molding material between the injection actuator and the inlet face is taken into account in the conversion. (Rose Pg 19)
PNG
media_image1.png
370
945
media_image1.png
Greyscale
{Examiners note: Equation for melt compression rate; Qscrew (which is associated with velocity of the screw/ram), and the melt compression rate, flow rate of material out of nozzle, and barrel pressure may be considered for simulation.}
Claim 4
Modified HSU with Rose teaches The method according to claim 1, wherein the compressibility of the molding material is taken into account in the conversion by scaling the nominal profile such that a volume resulting from the nominal profile and entering the inlet face for each time step corresponds to a volume, calculated in the simulation, of the molding material in the simulation domain and/or in the cavity at the respective time step, (Rose pg. 26) {EXAMINERS NOTE: The filing control realized through simulation is used to set "absolute ram speed profile" by "Flow rate vs time." }
preferably wherein the nominal profile is calculated before the scaling without taking the compressibility into account. (Rose pg. 10) As disclosed the relationship between injection rate and filling rate is expressed as Qscrew=Qfill, and Qscrew is associated with velocity of the screw, and the expression for flow rate Qscrew=Qfill is set under condition that melt 1s incompressible.
Claim 5
Modified HSU teaches The method according to claim 1, wherein an optimization of the boundary conditions is carried out, (HSU 0054) “and the injection-molding simulation method 60 conclude with the step S610, in which the simulation is performed to simulate at least one second injection-molding process of the molding material 700 using the boundary conditions and the molding conditions.”
preferably wherein several simulations are carried out iteratively with different boundary conditions, particularly preferably wherein the boundary conditions are adapted to at least one simulation performed beforehand depending on the simulation result. (HSU 0067) “the at least one second injection-molding process is then simulated by moving the front surface 722 of the screw 720 from the line 11 to the line Ln using boundary conditions and the molding conductions obtained in the previous simulation to generate the other molding conditions.”
Claim 6
Modified HSU teaches The method according to claim 1, wherein the simulation domain comprises - at least one sprue region, and/or - at least one hot runner system, and/or - at least one machine nozzle, and/or - at least one barrel flange. (HSU 0050) “the simulating domain 70 is obtained from a computer aided design (CAD) model, which is also used to design and develop the barrel 710 corresponding to the barrel 210 of the molding machine 20 and a product including the mold cavity 730 corresponding to the mold cavity 330, a first taped segment 740 corresponding to the runner 340, and a second taped segment 750 corresponding to the sprue 450. In some embodiments, the simulating domain 70 may further include a screw 720 corresponding to the screw 220 of the molding machine 20 and a nozzle 760 between the barrel 710 and the second taped segment 750 of the product”.
Claim 7
Modified HSU teaches The method according to claim 1, wherein the simulation and/or the overall simulation is a CFD simulation. (HSU 0051) “the injection-molding simulation method 60 can continue with step S604, in which a mesh 800 is created by dividing at least one part of the simulation domain 70 into at least one set of elements 802 before performing a numerical analysis, such as a finite element method (FEM), a finite difference method (FDM) or a finite volume method (FVM). The creation of the meshes 800 is a technique of modeling a fluid region and/or the product to be analyzed with at least one set of elements 802 in order to perform the subsequent numerical analysis. In some embodiments, the set of the elements 802 includes triangle mesh, rectangular mesh, hexahedral mesh or tetrahedral mesh.” {Examiners note: FEM, FDM, and FVM are CFD simulations.}
Claim 14.
Modified HSU teaches The method for operating a molding machine wherein - a nominal profile for the movement of the injection actuator of the molding machine is calculated according to - the nominal profile for the movement of the injection actuator is transferred to the molding machine (HSU 0045) “The computer 50 is associated with the molding machine 20 and configured to execute a computer assisted engineering (CAE) simulation software and transmit at least one simulation result to the controller 270 through a connection such as a hard wire connection or a wireless coupling.” {Examiners note: Injection molding simulation takes into consideration motion of the screw 720 in the barrel 710}
a molding process is performed on the molding machine using the nominal profile for the movement of the injection actuator (HSU 0068) “The molding conditions of the molding material 700 in the simulating domain 70, . . . can be simulated by using the equations (7) to (9) mentioned above, which can be solved numerically by setting the boundary conditions of the mesh 800 while taking into consideration the at least one motion of the screw 720 in the barrel 710 and performing the numerical analysis on the simulation molding phenomena of the molding material 700 in the simulating domain 70. The actual molding can then be conducted in the injection-molding machine 20 as shown in FIG. 1.”
Claim 16.
Modified HSU teaches A molding machine, which is designed to perform the method according to claim 14. (HSU 0045) “The computer 50 is associated with the molding machine 20 and configured to execute a computer assisted engineering (CAE) simulation software and transmit at least one simulation result to the controller 270 through a connection such as a hard wire connection or a wireless coupling.” {Examiners note: Injection molding simulation takes into consideration motion of the screw 720 in the barrel 710 } (HSU 0068) “The molding conditions of the molding material 700 in the simulating domain 70, . . . can be simulated by using the equations (7) to (9) mentioned above, which can be solved numerically by setting the boundary conditions of the mesh 800 while taking into consideration the at least one motion of the screw 720 in the barrel 710 and performing the numerical analysis on the simulation molding phenomena of the molding material 700 in the simulating domain 70. The actual molding can then be conducted in the injection-molding machine 20 as shown in FIG. 1.”
Claim 17.
Modified HSU teaches A computer program product, comprising commands which cause a molding machine to perform the method according to claim 14. (HSU 0045) “The computer 50 is associated with the molding machine 20 and configured to execute a computer assisted engineering (CAE) simulation software and transmit at least one simulation result to the controller 270 through a connection such as a hard wire connection or a wireless coupling.” {Examiners note: Injection molding simulation takes into consideration motion of the screw 720 in the barrel 710 } (HSU 0068) “The molding conditions of the molding material 700 in the simulating domain 70, . . . can be simulated by using the equations (7) to (9) mentioned above, which can be solved numerically by setting the boundary conditions of the mesh 800 while taking into consideration the at least one motion of the screw 720 in the barrel 710 and performing the numerical analysis on the simulation molding phenomena of the molding material 700 in the simulating domain 70. The actual molding can then be conducted in the injection-molding machine 20 as shown in FIG. 1.”
Claim 18.
Modified HSU teaches A computer program product, comprising commands which prompt a computer executing them to perform the method according to claim 1 with the predefined simulation domain. (HSU 0007) “The method includes steps of specifying a simulating domain comprising a mold cavity and a barrel of an injection machine” (HSU claim 1) “specifying, via computer-assisted engineering simulation software,”
Claims 8-12, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HSU et al., US 2020/0376733 (HSU) in view of Andy Rose et al., The effect of melt compressibility on mold filling of thin-walled parts (Rose) in further view of Chang et al., US 8,868,389 B2 (Chang).
Claim 8
Modified HSU with Rose does not explicitly teach, but Chang teaches The method according to claim 7, wherein a density profile at the inlet face is calculated from the volume flow profile and/or the pressure profile at the inlet face, (Chang col 8 Lines 15-28) “FIG. 9 is a chart showing the variation of the molding material 16 on the specific volume (density) with respect to the pressure and the temperature in accordance with various embodiments of the present disclosure. As shown in FIG. 9, the specific volume of the molding material 16 shrinks as the temperature decreases, and vice versa; in addition, the specific volume of the molding material 16 shrinks as the pressure increases, and vice versa. During the filling stage of the injection molding, the temperature and the pressure in the barrel 11 may not be kept constant, and the specific volume of the molding material 16 is not constant; therefore, the present disclosure may acquire the temperature and the pressure of the molding material 16 in the barrel 11 and then calculate the specific volume of the molding material 16 correspondingly.”
preferably wherein a physical model is used for the relationship between pressure, temperature and density, particularly preferably a Tait approach, a Renner approach and/or an IKV approach. (Chang col 8 Lines 15-28) “During the filling stage of the injection molding, the temperature and the pressure in the barrel 11 may not be kept constant, and the specific volume of the molding material 16 is not constant; therefore, the present disclosure may acquire the temperature and the pressure of the molding material 16 in the barrel 11 and then calculate the specific volume of the molding material 16 correspondingly.” {Examiners note: Temperature and pressure of molding material is acquired to calculate the specific volume of the molding material}.
HSU, Rose, and Chang are analogous to the claimed invention because they are from the same field of endeavor of INJECTION-MOLDING simulation.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of HSU, Rose, and Chang before him or her, to modify the simulation of HSU with the volume profile calculation of Rose and the density profile calculation of Chang to “serve as an assisting means suitable for optimization of the molding conditions. (Chang col 1 Lines 38-39)
Claim 9
Modified HSU with Rose and Change teaches The method according to claim 8, wherein the molding material between the injection actuator and the inlet face is assigned a barrel pressure profile and/or a spatial pressure distribution profile using the at least one pressure profile at the inlet face, preferably wherein the barrel pressure profile or the pressure distribution profile of the molding material between the injection actuator and the inlet face - is assumed to be spatially uniform and/or to correspond to the pressure profile at the inlet face, and/or - is assumed to be ascending or descending with a gradient. (Chang col 7 Lines 1-22) “In some embodiments, the amount of the molding material 16 injected into the mold cavity 25 by the screw 15 in the barrel 11 can be acquired by using the following governing equations. where u represents the velocity vector (flow velocity), T represents the temperature, t represents the time, p represents the pressure, a represents the total stress tensor, p represents the density, ri represents the viscosity, k represents the thermal conductivity, Cp represents the specific heat, and y represents the shear rate.
Claim 10
Modified HSU with Rose and Change teaches The method according to claim 9, wherein a density profile and/or a spatial density distribution profile of the molding material between the injection actuator and the inlet face is calculated from the barrel pressure profile and/or the spatial pressure distribution profile of the molding material between the injection actuator and the inlet face, preferably wherein a physical model is used for the relationship between pressure, temperature and density, particularly preferably a Tait approach, a Renner approach and/or an IKV approach. (Chang col 8 Lines 15-28) “During the filling stage of the injection molding, the temperature and the pressure in the barrel 11 may not be kept constant, and the specific volume of the molding material 16 is not constant; therefore, the present disclosure may acquire the temperature and the pressure of the molding material 16 in the barrel 11 and then calculate the specific volume of the molding material 16 correspondingly.” {Examiners note: Temperature and pressure of molding material is acquired to calculate the specific volume of the molding material}.
Claim 11.
Modified HSU with Rose and Change teaches The method according to claim 1, wherein a mass profile of the molding material between the injection actuator and the inlet face is determined, in particular iteratively, via a mass balance (Chang col 8 lines 42-67) “The above governing equations described in paragraph [0048] are complicated, and numerical solving of these equations may require a lot of computation source and time. In some embodiments, assuming the viscosity within the time interval delta t is constant, and assuming the temperature variation within a time interval delta t is not large enough to generate significant influence and can be neglected; consequently, the above governing equations can be simplified into a mass conservation expression below wherein the former two integration calculate the mass of the molding material 16 at different injection times, The third integration calculates molding material 16 that is injected into the mold cavity 25 from the barrel 11 during the time interval li.t, wherein FR represents the filling rate of the molding material 16 that is injected into the mold cavity 25 by the screw 15 in the barrel 11 (the filling rate of the molding material 16 passing through the nozzle 14 between the barrel 11 and the mold cavity 25). The above mass conservation expression in the integral form can be converted into an algebraic expression below, which can be implemented numerically by using the computer.
preferably wherein - a mass of the molding material flowing off into the simulation domain is calculated from the at least one volume flow profile through the inlet face and the at least one barrel pressure profile at the inlet face and is particularly preferably iteratively subtracted, (Change Col 7 line 1- col 8 line 67) “which is configured to inject the molding material 16 from the barrel 11 into the mold cavity 25.” {Examiners note: It takes the pressure of the molding material 16 injected from the barrel 11 to the cavity 25 into calculation, and the mass conservation expression simplified from the governing equations at least takes the filling rate of the molding material 16 passing through the nozzle 14 between the barrel 11 and the mold cavity 25 and the volumes (V) of the molding material 16 in the barrel 11 at different injection times are acquired from the positions of the screw 15 into calculation}
and/or - a mass of the molding material flowing off via a non-return valve of the injection actuator is taken into account. (HSU 0054) “describe the physical change of the molding material 700 injected into the mold cavity 730 by the screw 720 in the barrel 710, including the change of mass, momentum and energy”.
Claim 12.
Modified HSU with Rose and Change teaches The method according to claim 11, wherein a nominal volume flow profile of the molding material between the injection actuator and the inlet face is calculated from the mass profile, preferably wherein the density profile and/or the density distribution profile of the molding material between the injection actuator and the inlet face is used, (Chang col 8 lines 42-67) “The above governing equations described in paragraph [0048] are complicated, and numerical solving of these equations may require a lot of computation source and time. In some embodiments, assuming the viscosity within the time interval delta t is constant, and assuming the temperature variation within a time interval delta t is not large enough to generate significant influence and can be neglected; consequently, the above governing equations can be simplified into a mass conservation expression below wherein the former two integration calculate the mass of the molding material 16 at different injection times, The third integration calculates molding material 16 that is injected into the mold cavity 25 from the barrel 11 during the time interval li.t, wherein FR represents the filling rate of the molding material 16 that is injected into the mold cavity 25 by the screw 15 in the barrel 11 (the filling rate of the molding material 16 passing through the nozzle 14 between the barrel 11 and the mold cavity 25). The above mass conservation expression in the integral form can be converted into an algebraic expression below, which can be implemented numerically by using the computer. {EXAMINERS NOTE: governing equations regarding the amount of the molding material 16 injected into the mold cavity 25 by the screw 15 in the barrel 11 is directed to volume variation of the molding material 16, which is then simplified into a mass conservation expression.}
and wherein a nominal profile for the movement of the injection actuator is calculated from the nominal volume flow profile (HSU 0054) “describe the physical change of the molding material 700 injected into the mold cavity 730 by the screw 720 in the barrel 710, including the change of mass, momentum and energy”.
Claim 15.
Modified HSU with Rose and Change teaches The method according to claim 1 for the transfer and adaptation of a nominal profile for the movement of a further injection actuator from a further molding machine to the at least one molding machine , wherein - at least one molding process is performed on at least one further molding machine with a nominal profile for the movement of a further injection actuator, (HSU 0068) “The molding conditions of the molding material 700 in the simulating domain 70, . . . can be simulated by using the equations (7) to (9) mentioned above, which can be solved numerically by setting the boundary conditions of the mesh 800 while taking into consideration the at least one motion of the screw 720 in the barrel 710 and performing the numerical analysis on the simulation molding phenomena of the molding material 700 in the simulating domain 70. The actual molding can then be conducted in the injection-molding machine 20 as shown in FIG. 1.”
- at least one further overall simulation of the at least one molding process is carried out on the further molding machine, - a further simulation domain is defined, wherein the further simulation domain comprises the at least one cavity of the mold installed on the further molding machine, (HSU 0039) “Referring to FIG. 1, the injection-molding apparatus 10 that can be used to carry out molding includes a molding machine 20,” (0050) “the injection-molding simulation method 60 can begin at step S602 where the simulating domain 70 at least including a barrel 710 and a mold cavity 730 are specified.” {EXAMINERS NOTE: The injection molding simulation method 60 is done by this.}
- the nominal profile for the movement of a further injection actuator of the further molding machine is converted into a volume flow profile through an inlet face and/or at least one pressure profile at the inlet face at the edge of the further simulation domain, (HSU 0056) “According to the equation (1 ), which describes the movement of the molding material 700, an amount of the molding material 700 entering the molding cavity 730 is equal to an amount of the molding material 700 flowing out of the barrel 710 with respect to a linear motion of the screw 720 in the filling stage. In other words, the amount of the molding material 700 transferred into the mold cavity 730 by the screw 720 in the barrel 710 depends on the motion of the screw 720 with respect to the velocity field (u).”
- the method according to is carried out with the volume flow profile and/or the pressure profile. (Chang col 6 line 5 - col 8 line 14) “a step 305 of generating at least one flow parameter of a molding material in the barrel . . . the volume variation may be calculated from pressure of the molding material 16 injected into the mold cavity 25 from the tube (barrel) 11, at least one flow parameter of the molding material in the barrel 11 is taken into consideration for specifying boundary conditions of the mesh of the simulating domain 200, and injection molding process of the molding material 16 that is injected into the mold cavity 25 is simulated at step 309 by using the boundary conditions to generate a plurality of molding conditions.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HSU et al., US 2020/0376733 (HSU) in view of Andy Rose et al., The effect of melt compressibility on mold filling of thin-walled parts (Rose) in further view of Wagner et al., US 2021/0326498 Al (Wagner).
Claim 13
Modified HSU with Rose does not explicitly teach, but Wagner teaches The method according to claim 1, wherein the number of points of the nominal volume flow profile for the movement of the injection actuator is reduced by means of a reduction algorithm to an amount that is suitable for the machine control system of the molding machine (Wagner 014) “By using the algorithm a reduced point set of the measurement progression MV is therefore obtained, which consists of various kinks (the reduced point set). These kinks represent points wherein e.g. the slope could have changed significantly (which naturally depends on the reduction algorithm and the tolerance settings thereof).” {Examiners note: Under BRI these reduced point sets could be points of nominal volume.}
HSU, Rose, and Wagner are analogous to the claimed invention because they are from the same field of endeavor of real process simulation.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of HSU, Rose, and Wagner before him or her, to modify the simulation of HSU with the volume profile calculation of Rose, and the reduction algorithm of Wagner so that “a deviation which can then be used subsequently for the reproducible and reliable adjustment of the simulation.” (Wagner 0007)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN DAVID HAGLER whose telephone number is (703)756-1339. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10am- 6pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Rehana Perveen can be reached at 5712723676. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOHN DAVID HAGLER/ Examiner, Art Unit 2189
/REHANA PERVEEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2189